Stop building new prisons in Oklahoma

[Conan71]

This is only Federal prisons, not state.  I suspect Oklahoma will keep up the status quo with their DOC guests.

[erfalf]

I will say that privatization always kind of sounds like a good idea, but only from a financial prospective. It has basically turned our congressmen into money managers instead of legislators.

[patric]

Without legislative action, Oklahoma will need three new prisons during the next 10 years

http://newsok.com/without-legislative-action-oklahoma-will-need-three-new-prisons-during-the-next-10-years/article/5530785

[heironymouspasparagus]

I will say that privatization always kind of sounds like a good idea, but only from a financial prospective. It has basically turned our congressmen into money managers instead of legislators.

There are certain functions of government that should never be privatized.  Prisons is one.  Water and sewer service is another.  Internet.   Roads.  Bridges.  Law enforcement.  Armed forces (mercenaries never work out well for a civilization.)  Health/drug research.

Anything that directly affects the overall well being of the population and adversely affects the concept of "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness..." for more than 50% of the population.

Even natural gas and electricity are arguably at least a quasi-governmental function that should be operated at most from a co-op perspective.  And the whole idea behind the creation of FERC and allowing vital commodities to be traded in an options market environment - insanity.  Right up there with the housing financial instruments that brought us the last near depression.    No excuse except to allow billionaires to continue their rape/pillage efforts on the economy.

[Conan71]

Without legislative action, Oklahoma will need three new prisons during the next 10 years

http://newsok.com/without-legislative-action-oklahoma-will-need-three-new-prisons-during-the-next-10-years/article/5530785

Then what exactly was the purpose of the SQ's which just passed in November regarding these very reforms which are supposed to limit the number of people being incarcerated and decrease the prison populations?

Did I miss something?

[cannon_fodder]

Heironymous - you pretty well just described Cuba or North Korea.  All "essential" services and commodities are government run.  Not even France or the Nordic countries goes as far as you are arguing for.

I mean, good for you.  We need some old school pinkos to move the overall needle to the left.  But damn!   

[heironymouspasparagus]

Heironymous - you pretty well just described Cuba or North Korea.  All "essential" services and commodities are government run.  Not even France or the Nordic countries goes as far as you are arguing for.

I mean, good for you.  We need some old school pinkos to move the overall needle to the left.  But damn!  

No.  I didn't.  I was describing an America where everybody gets to participate in the American Dream.  But according to what you are saying, it's ok for Corporate America to get all the perks, but not the other 99%+ or us??


Do you really think private water/sewer service is better?  Or police?  Prisons.  Road/bridge construction.  Mercs over US Armed forces?  Did we learn NOTHING from the Romans??  We even got rid of the draft, against the wishes of our military experts.

Health and drug research has been funded Federally for decades!  It is the ONLY way the vast majority of new drugs have been brought to market in this country.  None of those drugs we are bombarded with ads on tv were developed on 'spec'.  We paid for most of it.  And yeah, I got the people working in Eli Lilly who know and have spilled the beans!   And some of them were at other drug purveyors before that.  Epipen is a prime example that has been in the news this year.


What else was there?   Well, internet is now being brought to many cities by the cities themselves since they have found that if you are gonna require kids in school to do research on the internet, but not provide the resources, the class divide is real and all too painfully obvious between the haves and the have nots.

Don't really care if gas/electric are private - but don't go giving corporate socialism in the form of allowing these monopolies to run rampant.  In particular in the way I mentioned - creation of FERC and allowing the whole process of energy become just another options on the commodity markets.   We see how well that works with the example of Enron jerking the energy market around, with a little help from our home grown buddies, Devon and Williams Co also participating.  Much bigger communistic approach than anything I mentioned.  Along with all the other corporate welfare forms we have in this country.  Corporate Welfare is touted and promoted by they "Trump Ilk" as somehow being Capitalism and good for the country...well except for the fact that it isn't.  And isn't.  Takes me full circle back to the statement about;

"Anything that directly affects the overall well being of the population and adversely affects the concept of "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness..." for more than 50% of the population."

If we aren't gonna balance it out for the rest of us, then at least pull them back to neutral.

But that would mean the 1/2%'ers wouldn't get their big payoffs...can't have that!


Tag.  You're it....

[cannon_fodder]

Not sure where to start...  so I will regress.  Not even the most socialist countries take it as far as you are advocating.

For the most part, I'm neutral on privatization of government services.  It is not inherently good or inherently bad.  In some instances it is great, in others it is an utter disaster.  Sometimes those norms hold over industries or services, sometimes one government can provide a service way better than private industry while another government cannot.  Examples:

The American hybrid system for electric utilities works fairly well.  We get more power, more consistently, to more people, more affordably than any other nation.  It is relatively efficient and the overall service is spectacular.  Yet private industry absorbs the risk and is allowed to make a marginal profit.  Same for our refuse collection.

Water systems are largely government run.  We have among the best water in the world - BUT, political pressure has caused those systems to degrade as a cost "saving" measure.  The result is the need for massive investment in the near future to avert additional crisis like we saw in Flint.  Or, for that matter, frequent ruptures and costly repairs like we see in Tulsa.

Most of our infrastructure is built by private contractors - allowing many entities to bid on a job.  Lets see who can do it well and the most efficient.  If the government was given a monopoly on such projects, the efficiency inevitably declines.

Healthcare is messed up - I readily acknowledge that.  We are really bad at preventative care, healthy lifestyles, and at keeping costs reasonable.  But the US private healthcare industry does a better job on the technical and innovative aspects of medicine than anyone else r (yes, universities and grants do a lot of good work also.  But private dollars overwhelm public ones).  Cuba or Canada, with their excellent healthcare services, are not providing technological or pharmaceutical innovations.    In fact, the US far and away spends more money on R&D than the rest of the world in most fields. 

Certainly internet innovation is a great example of the private sector taking a government idea running away with it.  Without government research, there would be no internet.  Without the private sector taking it up, the internet would remain a research and military curiosity.  The actual utility aspect of it is more complicated, and I agree with the Obama administration that it should be treated like a utility and carefully scrutinized for abuse of monopoly power.  I have no problem with municipal coops entering the marketplace if that's what it takes to keep competition moving forward.  (Two or three companies coming to dominate their respective exclusive zones is bad for innovation, bad for progress, and bad for consumers)

Some things I am extremely leery about being private:  security at the Courthouse for example (either there is a real need for real security, or there isn't), I think private "security contractors" in war zones or to protect US military basis is a horrible idea, and I think private prisons are an idea worth examining - that have now been examined and turned out to be bad policy.  It creates a profit motive to lobby for mass incarceration.  When closing a prison is "bad for business" there are business incentives contrary to public good.  So the idea should be rolled back.  That business incentive vs. public good applies to many, many areas of privatization (see, e.g., privatizing Social Security).

So private/public is a debate that needs to be had, and needs to be updated frequently. But historically, when the government monopolizes something it becomes inefficient and stagnant.  That holds true over and over, and it isn't likely to change. So if/when the government monopolizes something or decides to enter the marketplace, there needs to be a good reason and close inspection.

[Conan71]

Here's my question:

If a private company can step in, run a prison, and make real profit with zero in subsidies how can the operate a prison cheaper than the government can?

If they pay lower wages than the state to make a profit then it seems they would have a staffing shortage.  If it's economy of scale on purchases, it would have to only be a marginal gain in profit considering the purchasing power state government would generally have.  Many state governments will operate a system much like GSA does- if you want to sell us floor wax and toilet cleaner, you have to give us a discount spread over given quantities.

In my personal experience, I worked for a Fortune 500 which had such interface with city, state, and the GSA.  I can positively say that a large health facility company like Columbia HCA didn't get a better discount than the GSA or that one of the private prison operators didn't get a better pricing structure for supplies than the federal prison system.

I'd love to know how this is possible.

[Townsend]

Here's my question:

If a private company can step in, run a prison, and make real profit with zero in subsidies how can the operate a prison cheaper than the government can?

If they pay lower wages than the state to make a profit then it seems they would have a staffing shortage.  If it's economy of scale on purchases, it would have to only be a marginal gain in profit considering the purchasing power state government would generally have.  Many state governments will operate a system much like GSA does- if you want to sell us floor wax and toilet cleaner, you have to give us a discount spread over given quantities.

In my personal experience, I worked for a Fortune 500 which had such interface with city, state, and the GSA.  I can positively say that a large health facility company like Columbia HCA didn't get a better discount than the GSA or that one of the private prison operators didn't get a better pricing structure for supplies than the federal prison system.

I'd love to know how this is possible.

Just my thoughts - overcrowding brings more money per head, so private prisons work on keeping business hot.  I'm guessing their lobbying is all about keeping weed illegal and three strikes rule going strong.

Understaffing has been an issue for years with Oklahoma Prisons - I'm guessing private prisons are cool with that, given lower overhead.

Like chicken farms, there is always acceptable cost savings when the product isn't something considered worth protecting.

[heironymouspasparagus]

Not sure where to start...  so I will regress.  Not even the most socialist countries take it as far as you are advocating.

For the most part, I'm neutral on privatization of government services.  It is not inherently good or inherently bad.  In some instances it is great, in others it is an utter disaster.  Sometimes those norms hold over industries or services, sometimes one government can provide a service way better than private industry while another government cannot.  Examples:

The American hybrid system for electric utilities works fairly well.  We get more power, more consistently, to more people, more affordably than any other nation.  It is relatively efficient and the overall service is spectacular.  Yet private industry absorbs the risk and is allowed to make a marginal profit.  Same for our refuse collection.

Water systems are largely government run.  We have among the best water in the world - BUT, political pressure has caused those systems to degrade as a cost "saving" measure.  The result is the need for massive investment in the near future to avert additional crisis like we saw in Flint.  Or, for that matter, frequent ruptures and costly repairs like we see in Tulsa.

Most of our infrastructure is built by private contractors - allowing many entities to bid on a job.  Lets see who can do it well and the most efficient.  If the government was given a monopoly on such projects, the efficiency inevitably declines.

Healthcare is messed up - I readily acknowledge that.  We are really bad at preventative care, healthy lifestyles, and at keeping costs reasonable.  But the US private healthcare industry does a better job on the technical and innovative aspects of medicine than anyone else r (yes, universities and grants do a lot of good work also.  But private dollars overwhelm public ones).  Cuba or Canada, with their excellent healthcare services, are not providing technological or pharmaceutical innovations.   In fact, the US far and away spends more money on R&D than the rest of the world in most fields.  

Certainly internet innovation is a great example of the private sector taking a government idea running away with it.  Without government research, there would be no internet.  Without the private sector taking it up, the internet would remain a research and military curiosity.  The actual utility aspect of it is more complicated, and I agree with the Obama administration that it should be treated like a utility and carefully scrutinized for abuse of monopoly power.  I have no problem with municipal coops entering the marketplace if that's what it takes to keep competition moving forward.  (Two or three companies coming to dominate their respective exclusive zones is bad for innovation, bad for progress, and bad for consumers)

Some things I am extremely leery about being private:  security at the Courthouse for example (either there is a real need for real security, or there isn't), I think private "security contractors" in war zones or to protect US military basis is a horrible idea, and I think private prisons are an idea worth examining - that have now been examined and turned out to be bad policy.  It creates a profit motive to lobby for mass incarceration.  When closing a prison is "bad for business" there are business incentives contrary to public good.  So the idea should be rolled back.  That business incentive vs. public good applies to many, many areas of privatization (see, e.g., privatizing Social Security).

So private/public is a debate that needs to be had, and needs to be updated frequently. But historically, when the government monopolizes something it becomes inefficient and stagnant.  That holds true over and over, and it isn't likely to change. So if/when the government monopolizes something or decides to enter the marketplace, there needs to be a good reason and close inspection.

You start by saying these ideas are the most socialist you have ever heard...then agree with most of them!   Closet Commie??

Water - as seen by their lead pipe fiasco...the big problem was NOT that it was government entity - it was who was running that entity.  And guess which side of the aisle the "cost cutters" were from?   Notice how Corpus Christi is having issues this week.  The "fails" in these systems are very easily directly connected to the umbrella concept of getting government less involved.  Flint directly because of "business" principles applied with NO regard for the human part of it.  Cut costs, cut taxes.  Corpus will be found to be from dumping by some industry that has been allowed to run rampant due to the overall 'gutting' of the EPA and the lax creation but most especially enforcement of regulations.  Similar issues with electric grid - old and decaying much faster than being repaired/replaced.  So we can cut taxes some more....

Electric.  At one time that was indisputable, but since we have moved more and more toward deregulation, big problems are starting to arise.  It does work fairly well, and it also is very much a case of corporate welfare/socialism.  And one of the reasons it still works as well as it does is because regulators are still pushing back just a little bit.  Relatively efficient - well, that is really open to discussion, since the grid automatically loses about 30% right of the top before one single electron flows in someone's house.  That just disappears into the ether as heat.  And it is allowed because it is "cost-effective", even though the cost of the extra generation capacity required is hidden not to mention the fact that 30% of the coal and natural gas used is just adding environmental problems without contributing anything to the effort.  Hidden cost right up front of 30% - actually more, because of unknown mitigation costs further down the line.  As for marginal profit - well it is virtually guaranteed profit and it is obviously good enough that some very big players are drooling all over themselves to get into that guaranteed market.

"Same for our refuse collection."  Definitely a hybrid.  $15 a month or so for city.  Don't know what private costs - haven't used one for longer than I can remember.  Some family does and are happy with it.  Broken Arrow seems to be very close to that and they provide trash bags for people to use!  Owasso $15 a month.   Cities do a fine job in the areas they serve - goes again to the whole idea of growth for growth's sake - extending the city beyond where the infrastructure can reasonably be provided....big fail.

Other infrastructure - roads, etc.  While much of it is built using contractors - not a problem to me - we have the same issue that affects so much of our life in this country - cut costs for the sake of cutting costs just so we can cut taxes.  Trying to run government as a business - just plain stupid.  That means lousy Oklahoma style roads.  Bridges with holes opening up on a regular basis.  Police, fire, etc in decline.  While we save our 1/4% on our taxes...Sorry trade, but it's more important the richest among us get the biggest break!


Bottom line - when Bush took over, he gave away the store to the tune of more than half a trillion dollars a year!  WAY beyond anything their "saviour" Ronny ever did!  We went from roughly a $300+ billion surplus to more than $300 billion deficit after his first round of tax cuts!  That's way over half a trillion!  And it continued for 10 years because Obama didn't have cojones enough to do what he and every real economist in the world knows to do - let those cuts expire!  And they continue in only slightly different form today.

Not even mentioning - well, I guess I will - the several more trillions given to big banks, automakers, and others for bailouts.  Oh, yeah, let's not forget the $90 billion given to Halliburton in NO BID contracts just because their CEO happened to be VP.  We have the "business plan" of what is gonna happen the next 4 years with Trump.  It's what was done during the Bush regime.  Only there will be even more of it.


So, if we can afford to give more than $6 trillion dollars to the richest people in the country, then we can spend a few hundred billion on the rest of us for some of the things I have mentioned.  It ain't socialism at all.  Nor is it communism.  It is exactly what I stated in the first post.

"Anything that directly affects the overall well being of the population and adversely affects the concept of "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness..." for more than 50% of the population."

[cannon_fodder]

No. I said you want to take the ideas further than any of the successful countries that are often seen as very socialist.  If you think any sector of any industry isn't run for the benefit of 50% of the population, the government should take it over.  You gave examples that include basically everything. 

Anything that directly affects the overall well being of the population and adversely affects the concept of "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness..." for more than 50% of the population.

What couldn't that encompass?

Socialism isn't a dirty word, the government will run anything and everything it has to for the benefit of the people. But that is exactly what Castro set out to do. Or Mao. Or Chavez.   I'm not arguing it is a bad idea in concept, just pointing out that it never seems to work out very well. 

[patric]

Just my thoughts - overcrowding brings more money per head, so private prisons work on keeping business hot.  I'm guessing their lobbying is all about keeping weed illegal and three strikes rule going strong.

Perhaps they are confident there will always be fuel for the fire.

For example:  Collinsville seems to have a habit of shaming people they arrest by posting their photos on Facebook.  A woman recently pulled over for "defective equipment" is alleged to have replied with: "Those dirty, lazy (cops) have nothing better to do then charge ME with a joint roach even though if (emphasis mine) I lived in a different state because I have epilepsy, I wouldn't of gotten in trouble."

Collinsville police allegedly fired back with: "If anyone else would like to exercise their rights by coming on our Facebook page and admitting to the very crimes they were charged with, then please feel free to do so" which looks a lot like an attempt to spin a hypothetical statement into a "confession."

The Tulsa Whirled elevated it into defamation with their headline  http://www.tulsaworld.com/communities/collinsville/news/woman-allegedly-admits-to-drug-crime-on-collinsville-police-department/article_f5642374-0160-5a9b-9a0d-6a53e9841c06.html

...but back on course, if this "trial by Facebook" doesnt become a Christmas present for some good lawyer, she's just being used to gum up the justice system and contribute to "urgent needs" to expand the prison industry.

[patric]

High Female Lockup Rate Targeted in Bill

http://kwgs.com/post/high-female-lockup-rate-targeted-bill

After her baby was murdered, this mother had the next 20 years of her life stolen in a flawed trial with shady evidence.
A judge threw out her lawsuit after deciding the civil rights violations werent part of a "policy or custom."

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/courts/judge-rules-for-city-of-tulsa-in-lawsuit-filed-by/article_d8c14ab3-5bd2-51e8-b64f-80088ede963b.html

[TulsaGoldenHurriCAN]

Oklahoma prison board asks lawmakers to triple agency's budget
https://newsok.com/article/5613456/oklahoma-prison-board-asks-lawmakers-to-triple-agencys-budget

'Not a wish list': Corrections asks Legislature for $1.57 billion, including $92 million for hepatitis C treatments

The Oklahoma Board of Corrections voted unanimously Tuesday to ask the state Legislature to triple its funding next fiscal year and provide the agency with a $1.57 billion budget.

"This request is not a wish list," said Oklahoma Department of Corrections Director Joe M. Allbaugh. "This is what we need. Oklahoma continues to send more people to prison, and it costs real money to house, look after and provide those individuals medical care — all of which we are required to do."



Tulsa World journalism makes a difference. Be part of the story. Join us. Start a digital subscription for only 99¢.

The $1.57 billion budget request includes: $884 million to add 5,200 beds to the prison system; $91.7 million to provide inmates with expensive hepatitis C drug treatments; $31.9 million for facility repairs, maintenance and critical needs; and $18.5 million for staff pay raises.

The request comes at a time when state prison facilities are at 113 percent of capacity, with 1,993 inmates assigned temporary beds and 975 sitting in county jails, waiting to be transferred to prison, officials said. The inmate population is expected to grow by 2,367 inmates by 2026.

https://www.tulsaworld.com/news/government/not-a-wish-list-corrections-asks-legislature-for-billion-including/article_be81f687-6bd2-54bf-8952-5dae71dc578f.html